Search for: All records

Students with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) represent a growing fraction of the college population. We plan to study the experiences of college students with ADHD majoring in science, engineering, and mathematics (SEM) and explore how those experiences relate to academic success (i.e., academic achievement, persistence, and creativity). For this work-in-progress paper, we present our project’s conceptual framework and share how specific aspects of it may relate to the academic success of students with ADHD. Our framework is based on Terenzini and Reason’s college impact model, which includes precollege characteristics and experiences, the organizational context, the college experience, and students’ educational outcomes (i.e., academic success). We also describe the quantitative portion of our two-part research study that will analyze longitudinal data from three nationally-administered, multi-institutional surveys. That analysis will guide further qualitative research focused on the college experience and academic success of college students with ADHD. 

Despite many studies confirming that active learning in STEM classrooms improves student outcomes, instructors’ adoption of active learning has been surprisingly slow. This work-in-progress paper describes our broader research study in which we compare the efficacy of a traditional active learning workshop (AL) and an extended version of this workshop that also specifically highlights instructor strategies to reduce resistance (AL+) on instructors’ beliefs about and actual adoption of active learning in undergraduate STEM classrooms. Through a randomized control trial (RCT), we aim to understand the ways in which these workshops influence instructors’ motivation to adopt and the actual use of active learning. This RCT involves instructors and students at a large number of institutions including two-year college, four-year college, and large research institutions in three regions of the country and strategies to reduce student resistance to active learning. We have developed and piloted three instruments, which allow for triangulation of classroom data: an instructor survey, a student survey, and a classroom observation protocol. This work-in-progress paper will cover the current progress of our research study and present our research instruments. 

Despite many studies confirming that active learning in STEM classrooms improves student outcomes, instructors’ adoption of active learning has been surprisingly slow. This work-in-progress paper describes our broader research study in which we compare the efficacy of a traditional active learning workshop (AL) and an extended version of this workshop that also specifically highlights instructor strategies to reduce resistance (AL+) on instructors’ beliefs about and actual adoption of active learning in undergraduate STEM classrooms. Through a randomized control trial (RCT), we aim to understand the ways in which these workshops influence instructors’ motivation to adopt and the actual use of active learning. This RCT involves instructors and students at a large number of institutions including two-year college, four-year college, and large research institutions in three regions of the country and strategies to reduce student resistance to active learning. We have developed and piloted three instruments, which allow for triangulation of classroom data: an instructor survey, a student survey, and a classroom observation protocol. This work-in-progress paper will cover the current progress of our research study and present our research instruments.